At a time when South Carolina legislators should be focusing on measures that will improve the lives of the state’s residents, such as education and business development measures, up pops the deeply divisive debate about “personhood.”

Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 12-9 to approve a bill that would effectively outlaw abortion in the state. The committee spent about two hours debating the bill before voting along party lines. Sen. Sandy Senn, a Republican from Charleston, believes the bill is unconstitutional and abstained from voting.

The Personhood Act defines life as starting at conception. Only two states, Kansas and Missouri, have passed similar laws. In both states, the laws include provisions making them subject to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Lieutenant Governor Kevin Bryant speaks during the Greenville Chamber of Commerce's first Gubernatorial Series Lunch at the Greenville Marriott on Monday, January 29, 2018.(Photo: LAUREN PETRACCA\STAFF)

It’s an election year, and many of the candidates, including Gov. Henry McMaster and one of his opponents in the governor’s race – Lt. Gov. Kevin Bryant of Anderson – are eager to remind voters that they oppose abortion. Bryant is the bill’s author. He initiated the bill when he was a state senator.

“We must do everything we can to protect the lives of South Carolinians, to include those of the born and unborn, young and old," McMaster said after the committee vote. "I believe that human life begins at conception, and I believe the people of South Carolina deserve for their laws to reflect the values they hold dear. I applaud the Senate Judiciary Committee’s decision to move this important legislation forward and ask that the Senate pass it without delay.”

If the measure passes in the full Senate, it will head to the House for committees there to debate.

The bill is problematic on a several levels. For one, the government shouldn’t be meddling in the personal decisions of individuals.

While state officials are well meaning in their mission to protect the unborn, perhaps they should consider funding more programs that prevent unwanted pregnancies.

The panel passed an amendment to grant protections for a mother whose life is in danger. But it does not include exceptions for cases of rape or incest, which seems short-sighted and cruel.

And let’s face it. If a woman wants to have an abortion and can’t get one in this state, she will go to a neighboring state that allows the procedures.

But in an election year, debates like this serve as a reminder to voters that candidates share their values. Similar measures have been introduced in previous years and have gone nowhere. This effort isn’t likely to pass either. Still it makes for good optics for candidates like McMaster and Bryant, who stress the importance of conservative values above all else.